1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Facts of recognition

On July 24, 2011, the Plaintiff related to the parties entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle B owned by A (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), and the Defendant entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle C, which is a route bus (hereinafter “Defendant”), No. 102.

A) On August 24, 2011, at around 00:00, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven by drinking alcohol content of 0.077%, and at the same time, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was driven in the area of Sungnam-si, Seonam-si. The five-lane roads near the department store bus stops depending on four-lanes from the area of the bus stop located in the area of the powder. (ii) Since D driving the Defendant vehicle was stopped at the bus stop located in the five-lane, it was not entering the bus stop at the bus stop, and it was stopped at the fourth-lane prior to the beginning of the bus stop. (iii) At the same time, D driving the Defendant vehicle was stopped at the bus stop in the area of the bus stop.

On the other hand, D's parked part was a place where parking and stopping is prohibited because yellow solid lines are installed.

3) A did not discover the Defendant’s vehicle which was stopped in front of the four-lane due to negligence of neglecting the duty of front-time care in the state of drinking and driving, and the latter part was shocked with the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

4) Due to the instant accident, the passenger F, G, H, I, J, K, K, L, M, etc. of the Plaintiff vehicle and the Defendant vehicle sustained each injury.

(1) The Plaintiff paid the victims of the instant accident KRW 430,610,320 as insurance proceeds. (2) On July 5, 2012, A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, etc., and the said judgment was finalized on October 18, 2012.

(A) each description of Gap's evidence 1 to 6 (including the number of branch offices), Eul's evidence 2 to 4, respectively, or the statement of evidence 2 to 4, as follows: (a) there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition of the Suwon District Court 201 Janam Branch 2046, Suwon District Court 201No3218).